In the 4.3.1. Direct and indirect specialization is following:

Formally, a bean X is said to specialize another bean Y if either:
• X directly specializes Y, or
• a bean Z exists, such that X directly specializes Z and Z specializes Y.

It is not fully straightforward to deduce that the second point here is not just redundant first case, but rather transitive relationship in indirect specialization.

Therefore I think the wording for indirect specialization should be enhanced. Explanation from Jozef is at http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/cdi-dev/2014-June/005082.html.